Political Dig

Federal Judge Calls Into Question Legitimacy Of Trump’s Presidency

During a speech Wednesday night in Cleveland, U.S. District Judge Dan Polster raised questions about the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s presidency.

While some political leaders, such as Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), have insisted that Trump is not a legitimate president because of his alleged ties to Russia, Justice Polster cites another reason to call out Trump.

According to several news outlets, the Judge told the audience that Trump’s recent attacks on the judges hearing challenges to his executive order on immigration were disheartening and argued that Trump’s questioning of Judge Robart’s legal opinion and motivation to protect and defend the constitution as he was sworn to do turns the question of Trump’s own legitimacy on its head.

“I think to say it publicly, that’s his right. But it calls into question, and some might even say forfeits, his or her own legitimacy. So I’ll leave it at that. It’s an important question, but that’s how I feel…I don’t believe there’s a single federal judge who would be intimidated by anybody. We took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and it means a lot. And I think that oath means even more today,” he said.

The president’s tweet after a federal judge in Washington blocked the enforcement of his disastrous immigration ban was upsetting to many in the judiciary.

“If Trump cannot comprehend the need to ensure his actions are constitutional after he pledged to uphold the constitution during his inauguration, the oath of presidency loses its meaning and its validity. In that case, the entire presidency of Donald Trump loses its validity, or legitimacy, as well.”

Polster’s remarks hold even more weight when considered next to those of Trump’s own Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, who called Trump’s attacks on Judge Robart “demoralizing.”

It bas become clear that Trump’s main goal since he tool office is to attack the only two institutions with an interest in and ability to check the president’s power: the media and the judiciary.